Article 36/2022

On what basis did the labour appeal court recently, in SA Teachers Union obo Kruger v Gauteng Department of Education and Others (2021) 32 SALLR 12 (LAC); (2021) 42 ILJ 827 (LAC), determine that the remedies of compensation and reinstatement cannot be granted simultaneously?

_____________________________________

The principles identified by the court entail, amongst others, the following:

in the case of a dismissal for misconduct or incapacity: being substantively or substantively and procedurally unfair

  • the primary relief is reinstatement or re-employment
  • the employee is to resume employment on the same terms and conditions as at the date of dismissal
  • the extent of retrospectivity is dependent on the discretion to be exercised by the arbitrator – the only limitation on such discretion is that it cannot be fixed earlier than the actual date of dismissal
  • compensation is an alternative relief to the primary relief and is mutually exclusive to the remedies of reinstatement/re-employment

dismissal for operational requirements/automatically unfair: substantively or substantively and procedurally unfair

  • the same principles as set out above apply here subject to s193(3) of the LRA – in addition, any other order may be made as considered to be appropriate

dismissal for misconduct/incapacity/operational requirements/automatically unfair: procedurally only unfair

  • in terms of s193(2)(d) of the LRA, no reinstatement/re-employment is applicable but only compensation

What approach did the constitutional court recently adopt, in NUMSA v Trenstar (Pty) Ltd (2023) 44 ILJ 1189 (CC)?

Is an employer entitled to rely on s68(1)(b) of the LRA to claim compensation for losses suffered during a protected strike/lockout?

In the scenario where an employer was not permitted to trade during the Covid-19 lockdown (i e hard lockdown), are the employees, who could not tender their services lawfully, entitled to their normal benefits, such as leave and bonus benefits?